Top Chef

JohnRov · May 26, 2006

I used to be a video editor and know how hard it is to edit hours of footage into the appropriate length. Tom's blog confirms that the debate on who should win was much more in depth and objective than we were shown.

I also find it interesting that they had cameras follow Dave and Stephan when they went out and then captured all their drinking on tape. Do you think this is one area where the producers were meddling? "Here guys, have another! This one's on us!"

It was an interesting show but I think they could have fit in more food/cooking stuff in.

howard88 · May 26, 2006

Coqquus I'm a thinkin you're missin the forest for the trees. It was simply my analysis and my conclusion. And if the producers brought back a chef who was eliminated due to one of the others dropping out, they certainly could have overlooked the missing of one dish by Dave. I ask, Should not the competition be

at least a bit more wieghted in favor of who the judges et.al. considered the best tasting dishes?

Dave Weinstein · May 26, 2006

The judges have gone into great detail (in their blogs on Bravo) on why they picked who they picked. Moreover, we have very incomplete data (we see a very small subset of what actually happened, and we don't get to taste the food).

I can't think of any reason to impugn the integrity of the judges by declaring that they were making decisions at the behest of network executives (something the judges have outright said did NOT happen).

There is a difference between, "I would have chosen differently, I think" and "Fix! Fix! Fix!".

--Dave

[Edited to change "my declaring" to "by declaring". Silly typos]

Edited May 26, 2006 by Dave Weinstein (log)

Jenny McClure · May 26, 2006

Coqquus I'm a thinkin you're missin the forest for the trees. It was simply my analysis and my conclusion. And if the producers brought back a chef who was eliminated due to one of the others dropping out, they certainly could have overlooked the missing of one dish by Dave. I ask, Should not the competition be
at least a bit more wieghted in favor of who the judges et.al. considered the best tasting dishes?
←

I think it would be unfair to Tiffany & Harold to overlook Dave only cooking 2 dishes. By only cooking 2, Dave had more time to think about and execute his dishes, whereas the H & T had the same time to do 3. Daves dishes should have been better in this challenge, who knows what the H & T would have come up with if they only had to do 2.

Tess · May 26, 2006

I think it would be unfair to Tiffany & Harold to overlook Dave only cooking 2 dishes. By only cooking 2, Dave had more time to think about and execute his dishes, whereas the H & T had the same time to do 3. Daves dishes should have been better in this challenge, who knows what the H & T would have come up with if they only had to do 2.
←

Plus, according to Tom's blog, the contestants got numerical scores on each round. (Admittedly, he only came out with this after people questioned the outcome on the boards.) If it was by numbers, a missing dish could cost you big.

After looking at the marathon on and off, I don't think they could have promoted David over Tiffani based on overall merit. I think there is a bit of that going on on these shows-- especially towards the end-- and Tom said that's what got Harold the final win. But to do that for Dave would have been unfair. Early on, Dave was close to being dismissed twice in a row for fairly basic mistakes and his wins were mostly team wins. Even when he won the Napa challenge, he was the only one who didn't do a creative quickfire challenge; he just made nachos. He deserved to win the long challenge, but it irked me to see Lee Ann dismissed after her performance in the quickfire. It was like the quickfire didn't count.

Well, as burned as I was that Lee Ann didn't get to the final, she came off looking very good here.

coquus · May 27, 2006

Coqquus I'm a thinkin you're missin the forest for the trees. It was simply my analysis and my conclusion. And if the producers brought back a chef who was eliminated due to one of the others dropping out, they certainly could have overlooked the missing of one dish by Dave. I ask, Should not the competition be
at least a bit more wieghted in favor of who the judges et.al. considered the best tasting dishes?
←

He got the best tasting dish, I'll give you that (for round three), but his dishes sucked for round one and were just better than the bar food Harold put out in round two, but H also received points for those wings. Tiffani, as I recall, got knocked for her knife skills in round one, and no salt, round two completely blew, but those poker guys didn't care, they prolly scored her pretty well, third round sucked but she did finish three. Kicked up marinara, I doubt anyone gave that high marks. Therefore she finished middle of the road on two maybe three, you can't fault the judges for scoring her ahead of Dave, plain and simple as I see it. I was pissed too, but I realized it was just my emotional dislike for Tiffani's character.

tryska · May 28, 2006

am i the only one who isn't shocked by Dave and Stephen being hungover in the kitchen the next day?

Granted they are on TV and it's the "Big Day" and all, but hungover folks working either FOH or BOH has been SOP in my resto experience. *lol*

as long as they can produce, i don't care if there's a giant cartoon hammer banging at there temples all afternoon long.

Drinking on the line was a bit over the top tho - they should have at least snuck out to take a sip. that would have been more like right.

Anyways - I'm thrilled to bits that Harold won, and that Dave's desserts got rave reviews.

One thing I noticed about both teams - in prepping his menu, Harold took the time to taste the wines and then put a menu together. Tiffany ont he other hand - decided her menu before tasting any of the wines. I guess that's why we got Artichoke dishes. I'm surprised that Stephen didn't speak up, but then again, that wasn't really his job was it.

My roommate and i were talking about what we would do in that position. The lesser part of me, screamed "Sabotage!" every step of the way, but then when I thought about it - i realized i most likely would have played good little soldier and let her make all the calls and sink or swim.

either way, I can't wait until Season 2. But I will console myself with Hell's Kitchen (my all time favorite) until then.

Elrushbo · May 29, 2006

am i the only one who isn't shocked by Dave and Stephen being hungover in the kitchen the next day?
Granted they are on TV and it's the "Big Day" and all, but hungover folks working either FOH or BOH has been SOP in my resto experience. *lol*
as long as they can produce, i don't care if there's a giant cartoon hammer banging at there temples all afternoon long.
Drinking on the line was a bit over the top tho - they should have at least snuck out to take a sip. that would have been more like right.
Anyways - I'm thrilled to bits that Harold won, and that Dave's desserts got rave reviews.
One thing I noticed about both teams - in prepping his menu, Harold took the time to taste the wines and then put a menu together. Tiffany ont he other hand - decided her menu before tasting any of the wines. I guess that's why we got Artichoke dishes. I'm surprised that Stephen didn't speak up, but then again, that wasn't really his job was it.
My roommate and i were talking about what we would do in that position. The lesser part of me, screamed "Sabotage!" every step of the way, but then when I thought about it - i realized i most likely would have played good little soldier and let her make all the calls and sink or swim.
either way, I can't wait until Season 2. But I will console myself with Hell's Kitchen (my all time favorite) until then.
←

One of those people on Hell's Kitchen is going to deck Gordon Ramsay, at some point people will have had enough no matter if they're trying for a job or not! Would make for great TV.

tryska · May 29, 2006

perhaps, but i doubt it.

i think any alpha males that step into his kitchen, does so after acknowledging Gordon's the alpha in there.

mrsadm · June 2, 2006

If you guys haven't seen it, Lee Anne's blog is very illuminative. Scroll down particularly for the part about the psych test, which had me guffawing at work.
Chef Wong
←
Oh my. How Bourdain of her. I liked her on the show, but now I love her and would buy her drinks anytime.
←

Where is Lee Anne's blog? I don't see it on the Bravo web site.

carpetbagger, esq. · June 2, 2006

"chef wong" was a hyperlink to her blog. don't bother clicking on it now though - it was taken down a while ago.

mrsadm · June 2, 2006

Jason32 said:
Holly, I agree with you on this point to a certain extent...was it the wisest thing to go out and get drunk the night before? No, probably not. However, it did not seem to affect their performance in the kitchen, evidenced by Dave's dessert which drew raves from all. Also, whether its right or not (not), at the least I think its understandable when an "employee" (Dave and Stephen) is not motivated to perform at his peak for a boss (Tiffani) who doesn't garner the employee's respect. Her treatment of her fellow competitors along with all the lying makes their behavior somewhat understandable. The greater motivation should have been the fact that this was playing out on national TV and may impact the direction of their careers in their chosen industry.
Dave and Stephen had three choices once the teams were set.
Most admirable: Make the best of an unpleasant situation and perform at the best of their professional ability.
Admirable: Refuse the assignment. Walk. Stephen can't really do this as he volunteered to work with Tiffani.
Least Admirable: Show up drunk, not commit yourself fully, talk behind the chef's back.
←

Most Entertaining: Show up drunk, act silly, talk behind chef's back.

joiei · June 2, 2006

Jason32 said:
Holly, I agree with you on this point to a certain extent...was it the wisest thing to go out and get drunk the night before? No, probably not. However, it did not seem to affect their performance in the kitchen, evidenced by Dave's dessert which drew raves from all. Also, whether its right or not (not), at the least I think its understandable when an "employee" (Dave and Stephen) is not motivated to perform at his peak for a boss (Tiffani) who doesn't garner the employee's respect. Her treatment of her fellow competitors along with all the lying makes their behavior somewhat understandable. The greater motivation should have been the fact that this was playing out on national TV and may impact the direction of their careers in their chosen industry.
Dave and Stephen had three choices once the teams were set.
Most admirable: Make the best of an unpleasant situation and perform at the best of their professional ability.
Admirable: Refuse the assignment. Walk. Stephen can't really do this as he volunteered to work with Tiffani.
Least Admirable: Show up drunk, not commit yourself fully, talk behind the chef's back.
←
Most Entertaining: Show up drunk, act silly, talk behind chef's back.
←

I know, like that does not happen in the real world. Please, high ideals are admirable, but in the real world, stuff happens and people will be just folks. I thought that showed real humaness for them to do that.

mrsadm · June 2, 2006

OK one final comment from me, I just got to see the last 2 episodes and go through this forum.

I<snip>
I hated the two cookie cutter brunettes who flanked Colicchio as judges. I could only differentiate them by their petulance and charmlessness. (Charmless was Billie Joel's current wife - Petulant was the one who sat on the other side). What kind of street creds do they have that would earn them those seats? Colicchio had genuine screen presence as well as mastery in his field, and everything he had to say carried weight. They had neither.
<snip>
←

I read on the Bravo web site that Billy Joel's wife is really, really, really interested in food and she writes a "culinary and lifestyle" column for the Hamptons magazine.

So why are you questioning her credentials, huh?

Edited to add: I wonder if Mr. Joel is an investor in Bravo ... hmmmm.....

:wink:

Edited June 2, 2006 by mrsadm (log)

Holly Moore · June 2, 2006

I know, like that does not happen in the real world. Please, high ideals are admirable, but in the real world, stuff happens and people will be just folks. I thought that showed real humaness for them to do that.

Real world here. Owned a restaurant. Worked in a bunch more.

They both would have been fired after turnout. Before or during if I had anyone else I could bring in. Hopefully, in a real kitchen, I would never have hired either in the first place.

To screw up and screw your boss may be human. So is being a professional. One sounds a lot better on reference check.

Note: Edited to add Joiei's quote and a bit of a re-write.

Edited June 2, 2006 by Holly Moore (log)

DeVeaux · June 2, 2006

Plus, Mrs. Joel is really skilled at chewing and swallowing food, and no longer eats play-doh OR crayons.

What more d'ya want, huh?

carpetbagger, esq. · June 2, 2006

What more d'ya want, huh?
←

for starters, a pulse.

Grub · June 2, 2006

Real world here. Owned a restaurant. Worked in a bunch more.
They both would have been fired after turnout. Before or during if I had anyone else I could bring in. Hopefully, in a real kitchen, I would never have hired either in the first place.
...
←

They might well have been fired in real life, but this was a competitive TV show. In real life, if Tiffany were to take part in a cookoff where she stood to win fame and fortune, she would never have picked these two people to assist her... And then again, in real life, if she had not been competing against these two people in a series of earlier cookoffs to win the top prize, she might never have behaved in the same way towards them in the first place (although I might see how she just possibly would).

TrishCT · June 2, 2006

From this week's New York magazine.

Question asked to Billy Joel:

How are you coping with the high price of gas?

Answer:

"We drive a hybrid car, but with my wife's organic-veggie food, we produce plenty of gas on our own."

Mmmmm...when's lunch...? :rolleyes:

RMeierdirks · June 3, 2006

Even if you think Dave should have lost due to missing a third course, I don't think Tiff should have been in final three to begin with. I still don't understand she was kept instead of Lee Ann after the Napa challenge. As I recall, Lee Ann's dish got good comments on flavor but was knocked mostly on presentation. Tiffani, on the other hand, got a lot of negative comments - cauliflower ruined the wine, gnocchi undercooked. Tom Colicchio said in his blog that Lee Ann's lamb was overcooked but I don't recall that in the episode. Maybe I missed it. It just seems they bring in all these guest tasters, thank them profusely for helping them make their decision, and then disregard them entirely. Either way, I don't think anyone would have been bothered if Dave had lost out to Lee Ann since she seems to be more respected by viewers (at least to judge from this board).

Dave Weinstein · June 3, 2006

Remember that we see a tiny subset of the discussions.

--Dave

coquus · June 4, 2006

I though Tiffani's lamb was raw in that one. It was Tiffani or LeeAnn who were going to go that episode. It's just that Chef Wong committed the cardinal sin of overcooking the lamb, which is a cardinal sin for a chef by the way. The stuffed gnocchi, her sauce, and puree was obviously a mess, but so was the butternut squash sauce. Plus they also cooked lamb, I think LeeAnn could have left her lamb raw as well and still won out, but since she didn't she was sent packing. I have a good deal of respect for the judging in the final episodes, the one I disagreed with the most was overcooked carrots Brian, who was the only one of his group trying to win it for his team and his carrots weren't the only stinky dish. Tiffani, Harold and whoever else were just lousy that episode too. But that whole contest was flawed to a degree I guess.

Brad K. · June 5, 2006

Plus, Mrs. Joel is really skilled at chewing and swallowing food, and no longer eats play-doh OR crayons.
What more d'ya want, huh?
←

When Billy met her 2 or 3 years ago she was working at a (now defunct) fish shop/take-out counter in Sag Harbor. She was terrific at weighing out cocktail shrimp! What more experience does she need???

Toasted · June 5, 2006

I loved this show and can't wait until the next one. I wonder why none of the chef's ever show up here? I'd love to hear their opionions on the show and how things went down. I think it would be a good egullet discussion, hint, hint!